Deviating from Definition of Early Intervention I am writing in response to the article “The SLP and Early Intervention with Infants and Toddlers with Hearing Loss” (March 24, 2009). The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) defines family-centered practice as strengthening “the capacity of parents to care for…their children and (promoting) the family's capacity ... Inbox
Free
Inbox  |   May 01, 2009
Deviating from Definition of Early Intervention
Author Notes
  • Ross Adams, San Diego, California
    Ross Adams, San Diego, California×
Article Information
Special Populations / Early Identification & Intervention / Inbox
Inbox   |   May 01, 2009
Deviating from Definition of Early Intervention
The ASHA Leader, May 2009, Vol. 14, 4. doi:10.1044/leader.IN1.14072009.4
The ASHA Leader, May 2009, Vol. 14, 4. doi:10.1044/leader.IN1.14072009.4
I am writing in response to the article “The SLP and Early Intervention with Infants and Toddlers with Hearing Loss” (March 24, 2009).
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) defines family-centered practice as strengthening “the capacity of parents to care for…their children and (promoting) the family's capacity to manage their own lives” (DHHS, 2008); however, Robbins strays from this definition. Instead, she suggests that SLPs who work in early intervention with young children with hearing loss dictate to families such things as the toys their children play with while failing to mention the abundant learning opportunities available in activities of everyday family life. Additionally, Robbins demonstrates a strong bias toward spoken over signed language, citing “full-time amplification use” as a “first skill…of high priority.” Statistically, this may be the choice of most parents; however, more neutral, family-centered language would be “to provide full-time access to a consistent language model,” toward which full-time amplification use would be a means to an end rather than the end itself.
Finally, Robbins beats the much-maligned horse of “natural environment policy,” claiming that “center-based services may be more effective than home-based services” while weakening her argument by reporting that “these interpretations exist in the absence of any published evidence showing an advantage for home- vs. center-based EI for babies with hearing loss.”
However, home visits are supported by research in social work and psychology in the areas of intensive family preservation and infant-family mental health.
0 Comments
Submit a Comment
Submit A Comment
Name
Comment Title
Comment


This feature is available to Subscribers Only
Sign In or Create an Account ×
FROM THIS ISSUE
May 2009
Volume 14, Issue 7